Globalist Inc. (Taiwan Branch) Democracy takes another blow .

In-depth debate on all topical issues
User avatar
Roy Twing
Registered user
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm
Location: 51 23 46 N 0 11 56 W

Re: Globalist Inc. (Taiwan Branch) Democracy takes another blow .

Post by Roy Twing »

Carlos J wrote:
Royal24s wrote:As we recall , the whole issue of " gay marriage"'sprang up from nowhere in various countries including our own.
There was no real call for it from the public and no particular campaign by homosexuals for that matter .
Nonetheless , all the world's leaders came home from a Bilderberg meeting and quite separately and independently decided to push it to the top of the Agenda. Remember how David Cameron suddenly came up with it even though it wasn't in, or even suggested to be included in his recent manifesto.
Many highlighted this at the time as proof that some unwarranted influence was being exerted on individual governments by hidden interest groups. Not an unreasonable conclusion really.

Anyway, to update this and put it into context with the current assault upon democracy by our own politicians , the BBC and global elitite cronies in the USA , they held a referrendum in Taiwan in which 70% of voters rejected gay marriage.

Guess what happened - their " Parliament " ignored that and brought it in anyhow !

Interesting that client states like this ,which would in the past have been pressured to adopt democratic practises now seem to be getting pressured in the other direction.

Not going to go all Hillman on you, Royal, but hey, a bit of a difference of opinion.

Firstly, the so what. Why can't those men whom bugger and like it and are together not have the same rights as those who like a dick in slit? And often on some research, not noted, also like a dick in the wrong 'un. Civil union blah, let them get married and enjoy it*

Bilderburg, blame it. :)

"Anyway, to update this and put it into context with the current assault upon democracy by our own politicians , the BBC and global elitite cronies in the USA , they held a referrendum in Taiwan in which 70% of voters rejected gay marriage."

I love hearing the lovely Cindy Sui from Taipei on 5Live and the World Service. Not sure if she's a western plant or a Chinese double agent, or a rare triple agent. Though she sounds lovely and makes Taiwan sound good. So good on her.

So how did we get here? Let the fake BBC begin: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-48305708
In 2017, Taiwan's constitutional court ruled that same-sex couples had the right to legally marry.
It said then that the island had two years to make necessary changes to the law.
But this was met with a public backlash, which pressured the government into holding a series of referendums.
The referendum results showed that a majority of voters in Taiwan rejected legalising same-sex marriage, saying that the definition of marriage was the union of a man and woman.
2018 Taiwanese multi-referendum from the less fake Mr Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Taiwanese_referendum shows all result to a vary of questions.

72% voted for 'Restricting marriage under Civil Code to one man and woman'
61% voted for 'Protecting rights of same-sex couples outside of the Civil Code'

So here we are now, 'As a result, Taiwan said it would not alter its existing definition of marriage in civil law, and instead would enact a special law for same-sex marriage'.

Who knows the facts? London, Washington, Beijing or Taipei?


If that means that the venue etc., takes place separate to traditional marriage, then it sounds like a good solution.
By all means call themselves 'married' if they want, but don't impinge on 'ours'.
Anyone (such as Tick) that uses 'gammon' as a racial pejorative is as much a racist as those who use the word nigger and similar pejoratively.
E & OE

User avatar
Royal24s
Registered user
Posts: 9081
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 1:42 am

Re: Globalist Inc. (Taiwan Branch) Democracy takes another blow .

Post by Royal24s »

Quote Carlos


Royal24s wrote:
As we recall , the whole issue of " gay marriage"'sprang up from nowhere in various countries including our own.
There was no real call for it from the public and no particular campaign by homosexuals for that matter .
Nonetheless , all the world's leaders came home from a Bilderberg meeting and quite separately and independently decided to push it to the top of the Agenda. Remember how David Cameron suddenly came up with it even though it wasn't in, or even suggested to be included in his recent manifesto.
Many highlighted this at the time as proof that some unwarranted influence was being exerted on individual governments by hidden interest groups. Not an unreasonable conclusion really.

Anyway, to update this and put it into context with the current assault upon democracy by our own politicians , the BBC and global elitite cronies in the USA , they held a referrendum in Taiwan in which 70% of voters rejected gay marriage.

Guess what happened - their " Parliament " ignored that and brought it in anyhow !

Interesting that client states like this ,which would in the past have been pressured to adopt democratic practises now seem to be getting pressured in the other direction.

Not going to go all Hillman on you, Royal, but hey, a bit of a difference of opinion.

Firstly, the so what. Why can't those men whom bugger and like it and are together not have the same rights as those who like a dick in slit? And often on some research, not noted, also like a dick in the wrong 'un. Civil union blah, let them get married and enjoy it*

Bilderburg, blame it. :)

"Anyway, to update this and put it into context with the current assault upon democracy by our own politicians , the BBC and global elitite cronies in the USA , they held a referrendum in Taiwan in which 70% of voters rejected gay marriage."

I love hearing the lovely Cindy Sui from Taipei on 5Live and the World Service. Not sure if she's a western plant or a Chinese double agent, or a rare triple agent. Though she sounds lovely and makes Taiwan sound good. So good on her.

So how did we get here? Let the fake BBC begin: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-48305708
In 2017, Taiwan's constitutional court ruled that same-sex couples had the right to legally marry.
It said then that the island had two years to make necessary changes to the law.
But this was met with a public backlash, which pressured the government into holding a series of referendums.
The referendum results showed that a majority of voters in Taiwan rejected legalising same-sex marriage, saying that the definition of marriage was the union of a man and woman.


2018 Taiwanese multi-referendum from the less fake Mr Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Taiwanese_referendum shows all result to a vary of questions.

72% voted for 'Restricting marriage under Civil Code to one man and woman'
61% voted for 'Protecting rights of same-sex couples outside of the Civil Code'

So here we are now, 'As a result, Taiwan said it would not alter its existing definition of marriage in civil law, and instead would enact a special law for same-sex marriage'.

Who knows the facts? London, Washington, Beijing or Taipei?
Maybe she's born with it, maybe it's Maybelline.

Non mihi, non tibi, sed nobis.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?



I think the facts are,as always, the most guarded secrets of all.

Perhaps I constructed the piece poorly because my intention was never to revisit the question of gay marriage itself and I put that in as background.

The fact, ( and that at least is a fact), that world leaders came home from Bilderberg and suddenly all came out with the idea of introducing gay marriage for the first time then forced it through their respective legislatures - well this I mentioned because I think it shows some puppet hand which is not democratic or accountable .

For what it's worth , my thoughts on gay marriage are unaltered , but unlike those who go on endlessly about Brexit and President Trump, I have to accept that we have lost that argument for the time being and in this world.

Now, what I was on about and what all that preamble was aimed at, ( poorly it seems because it wasn't clear ), are the shennanigans of a modern globalist government in making sure that the will of the people is always second to their own wishes and intentions.

The more detailed information you quote from wiki shows how hard they'll work to rephrase and rehash the same thing till they find an acceptable form of words to reconcile a democratic vote with an undemocratic act.

Reminds me of two things.
First, the odious May creature and her " deal to leave the EU" which is in reality a contract to keep us in the EU in all but name.
Secondly , Spike Milligan's advice for soldiers in a book I forget the name of, in which he suggests wearing your tunic and hat backwards in order that when you see the enemy you can run away whilst all the time appearing to advance and escape in all the confusion.

When it's all settled down , you can either rejoin the ranks or if things went badly take your hat off and mingle with the crowd.( that last bits mine)
'"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,
That is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know".

User avatar
Royal24s
Registered user
Posts: 9081
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 1:42 am

Re: Globalist Inc. (Taiwan Branch) Democracy takes another blow .

Post by Royal24s »

Roy Twing wrote:
Carlos J wrote:
Royal24s wrote:As we recall , the whole issue of " gay marriage"'sprang up from nowhere in various countries including our own.
There was no real call for it from the public and no particular campaign by homosexuals for that matter .
Nonetheless , all the world's leaders came home from a Bilderberg meeting and quite separately and independently decided to push it to the top of the Agenda. Remember how David Cameron suddenly came up with it even though it wasn't in, or even suggested to be included in his recent manifesto.
Many highlighted this at the time as proof that some unwarranted influence was being exerted on individual governments by hidden interest groups. Not an unreasonable conclusion really.

Anyway, to update this and put it into context with the current assault upon democracy by our own politicians , the BBC and global elitite cronies in the USA , they held a referrendum in Taiwan in which 70% of voters rejected gay marriage.

Guess what happened - their " Parliament " ignored that and brought it in anyhow !

Interesting that client states like this ,which would in the past have been pressured to adopt democratic practises now seem to be getting pressured in the other direction.

Not going to go all Hillman on you, Royal, but hey, a bit of a difference of opinion.

Firstly, the so what. Why can't those men whom bugger and like it and are together not have the same rights as those who like a dick in slit? And often on some research, not noted, also like a dick in the wrong 'un. Civil union blah, let them get married and enjoy it*

Bilderburg, blame it. :)

"Anyway, to update this and put it into context with the current assault upon democracy by our own politicians , the BBC and global elitite cronies in the USA , they held a referrendum in Taiwan in which 70% of voters rejected gay marriage."

I love hearing the lovely Cindy Sui from Taipei on 5Live and the World Service. Not sure if she's a western plant or a Chinese double agent, or a rare triple agent. Though she sounds lovely and makes Taiwan sound good. So good on her.

So how did we get here? Let the fake BBC begin: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-48305708
In 2017, Taiwan's constitutional court ruled that same-sex couples had the right to legally marry.
It said then that the island had two years to make necessary changes to the law.
But this was met with a public backlash, which pressured the government into holding a series of referendums.
The referendum results showed that a majority of voters in Taiwan rejected legalising same-sex marriage, saying that the definition of marriage was the union of a man and woman.
2018 Taiwanese multi-referendum from the less fake Mr Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Taiwanese_referendum shows all result to a vary of questions.

72% voted for 'Restricting marriage under Civil Code to one man and woman'
61% voted for 'Protecting rights of same-sex couples outside of the Civil Code'

So here we are now, 'As a result, Taiwan said it would not alter its existing definition of marriage in civil law, and instead would enact a special law for same-sex marriage'.

Who knows the facts? London, Washington, Beijing or Taipei?


If that means that the venue etc., takes place separate to traditional marriage, then it sounds like a good solution.
By all means call themselves 'married' if they want, but don't impinge on 'ours'.




Again , I didn't mean to re argue "gay marriage" but it's not about helping gay people ,it's about spitting on religion and degrading religious beliefs.
No one wants to stop them having any of the benefits of marriage but they don't need to use a religious term for it.
As I said earlier , it's like someone insisting that pork pies be labelled kosher or halal , or that salt beef be labelled " suitable for Hindus".

It's just a way in which the secular state thinks it's destroying respect for God and trying to replace Him.
'"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,
That is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know".

User avatar
Roy Twing
Registered user
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm
Location: 51 23 46 N 0 11 56 W

Re: Globalist Inc. (Taiwan Branch) Democracy takes another blow .

Post by Roy Twing »

Royal24s wrote:
Roy Twing wrote:
Carlos J wrote:
Royal24s wrote:As we recall , the whole issue of " gay marriage"'sprang up from nowhere in various countries including our own.
There was no real call for it from the public and no particular campaign by homosexuals for that matter .
Nonetheless , all the world's leaders came home from a Bilderberg meeting and quite separately and independently decided to push it to the top of the Agenda. Remember how David Cameron suddenly came up with it even though it wasn't in, or even suggested to be included in his recent manifesto.
Many highlighted this at the time as proof that some unwarranted influence was being exerted on individual governments by hidden interest groups. Not an unreasonable conclusion really.

Anyway, to update this and put it into context with the current assault upon democracy by our own politicians , the BBC and global elitite cronies in the USA , they held a referrendum in Taiwan in which 70% of voters rejected gay marriage.

Guess what happened - their " Parliament " ignored that and brought it in anyhow !

Interesting that client states like this ,which would in the past have been pressured to adopt democratic practises now seem to be getting pressured in the other direction.

Not going to go all Hillman on you, Royal, but hey, a bit of a difference of opinion.

Firstly, the so what. Why can't those men whom bugger and like it and are together not have the same rights as those who like a dick in slit? And often on some research, not noted, also like a dick in the wrong 'un. Civil union blah, let them get married and enjoy it*

Bilderburg, blame it. :)

"Anyway, to update this and put it into context with the current assault upon democracy by our own politicians , the BBC and global elitite cronies in the USA , they held a referrendum in Taiwan in which 70% of voters rejected gay marriage."

I love hearing the lovely Cindy Sui from Taipei on 5Live and the World Service. Not sure if she's a western plant or a Chinese double agent, or a rare triple agent. Though she sounds lovely and makes Taiwan sound good. So good on her.

So how did we get here? Let the fake BBC begin: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-48305708
In 2017, Taiwan's constitutional court ruled that same-sex couples had the right to legally marry.
It said then that the island had two years to make necessary changes to the law.
But this was met with a public backlash, which pressured the government into holding a series of referendums.
The referendum results showed that a majority of voters in Taiwan rejected legalising same-sex marriage, saying that the definition of marriage was the union of a man and woman.
2018 Taiwanese multi-referendum from the less fake Mr Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Taiwanese_referendum shows all result to a vary of questions.

72% voted for 'Restricting marriage under Civil Code to one man and woman'
61% voted for 'Protecting rights of same-sex couples outside of the Civil Code'

So here we are now, 'As a result, Taiwan said it would not alter its existing definition of marriage in civil law, and instead would enact a special law for same-sex marriage'.

Who knows the facts? London, Washington, Beijing or Taipei?


If that means that the venue etc., takes place separate to traditional marriage, then it sounds like a good solution.
By all means call themselves 'married' if they want, but don't impinge on 'ours'.




Again , I didn't mean to re argue "gay marriage" but it's not about helping gay people ,it's about spitting on religion and degrading religious beliefs.
No one wants to stop them having any of the benefits of marriage but they don't need to use a religious term for it.
As I said earlier , it's like someone insisting that pork pies be labelled kosher or halal , or that salt beef be labelled " suitable for Hindus".

It's just a way in which the secular state thinks it's destroying respect for God and trying to replace Him.


I tend to agree with most of your comments, but clearly I struggle on this topic, being an atheist.
On the other hand, as I've previously said many times, christian values as I understand them, are guidelines that I do my best to follow, and my take on this is that it is these values (and christianity itself) that the establishment is attacking - you may say that is the same as attacking god, I see it as part of the multiculturalism project.
Anyone (such as Tick) that uses 'gammon' as a racial pejorative is as much a racist as those who use the word nigger and similar pejoratively.
E & OE

User avatar
Royal24s
Registered user
Posts: 9081
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 1:42 am

Re: Globalist Inc. (Taiwan Branch) Democracy takes another blow .

Post by Royal24s »

You're quite right.
After the French Revolution they more or less banned the Church and persecuted Christians, but Napoleon reinstated it . He remained an atheist but also concluded, as had the Romans before him , that religion is one of the pillars upon which a society stands.
Conversely , those who wish to destroy a society are equally aware of how destructive it will be to damage its religious beliefs and of course this is the sole purpose of " gay marriage" along with many other whacky ideas.
In other words , for practical purposes as well as spiritual ones , Christianity is the backbone of British and American society and those who wish to destroy these societies therefore do as much as they can to destroy it, and this would of course include importing as many followers of backward and Godless religions as possible .
'"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,
That is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know".

Post Reply